Skip to main content

Full text of "Annual message ... to the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco"

See other formats



NOV 2 1975 




Not to be taken from the Library 

bocui I'll 

fmniK, 1 ^ Puauc l| b«arv 

3 1223 90119 7187 


Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2012 with funding from 

California State Library Califa/LSTA Grant 




I torable Board of Supervisors 

Cj I and County of S~n Francisco, 

z: v- \: 

Francisco, 2, California. I, A ^ f «a-mci 3 co 



The chr-rtcr provides that at the first meeting of your Honorable 3o-' ri 

in January, the Mayor shall submit his annua] message containing a genera] report 

on the City and County affairs of the preceding year, and recommending the adop- 
tion of such measures as he nay deem expedient end proper. 

At my request your Honorable Board submitted a charter amendment at 
last November's election changing the date for filing th 's annual nessaje 
fron your firLt mcctin;.; in January to your first neeting in October — thus con- 

raore closely tc the fiscal year. The voters approved this chrrter amend- 
ment, but as it has not yet been ratified by the Strte Legislature, I sh 
follow th>' present chsrter reouirenu-nts and submit ay -nnu' e now. However, 
I shall make it general in charpcter and touch only on what I deem is core impor- 
tant. This message will not include statistical data contained in ropcrts recently 
submitted by vprious departments — these re orts are in ray office files and open 
for inspection. 

CIVIL SSH7IC5 ??-0Crr 'JRZ . 

One observation deals with the subject of civil service, probably 
lost outstanding; example of the different relationship whi I reen 

management in private industry ana its employes, and city government and 
its civil servants. The problem of human relations ! . p s a tough one 
co solve to the satisfaction of all concerned, but in city business it is made 



. 75 39 


more difficult, because th chsrt r • civil service requirements dc- 
nf nd fixed procedures which do nt i - privati 03 ration. The civil service 

system was, of course, set up to prevent the old spoils system, 
main accomplished that end; "out my impressions at the conclusion of my '■ rra m 
thrt the Civil Service Commission rules rnd procedures, as wcl! as verious rctions 
trken by y^j.r Honorrblt Bosrd, hrve oper' tec", more to advsnee the special interests 
of city employes than to protect the general interests of the city itself — its 
citiz - ns ■• ■■" ' • crs. 

The charter gives the Civil Service Commission broad v- rs to fix its 
own examination ru] ■? and qualific . For instance, th< Civil Service Com- 
mission err, if it so desireSj v. strict promotion? 1 examinations to a very limited 
field composed of thosi alr< • dy hoi ling city joes, or can, in certain cases, throw 

xsmination open to_pny resident of the city, whethei ' loved by 
the city or not. I hold the opinion thrt the >rimary objective of civil service 
is to recur' th best person possible for any given job, and therefore that : 
examinations should be th rule of the day instead of the exception. I urge thrt 
art r bi pmended to establish this principle. 

But aside fror. any charter changes, much greater efficiency in city 
overnra nt end -t less cost to the taxpayer can be obtained if Department Heads 
the Civil Service Commission and its staff would consult together more 
freely and frequently. 

There should be gr ater cooperation between the Civil Service Commission 
and other departments of City government thee, there has been in the past. If a 
Hew Tear's resolution were ado e ;' and really carried out — 

"to :::::: pas: ::rn:z::cis aiz: stabi i^esh" 

i t would help r lot. 

CKAP.T" ?r.SI3"l":.C hhS'h'CTIOhS 

Anoth r t Lti{ heel the procurement of the best person 


for ?ny particular job is th chart r restriction; this provision 
(unl< ss waived by ruction of your Board) requires that all city employes must be 
nts of San Fra.ncisco for at lepst one year before they rre eligible for a. 
civil service job. 

Today, the Public Utilities Commission rione employes ^-07 persons whose 
work is of necessity performed in six counties outside of Sen Francisco — airport 
End ■■• t r partnent employes, end many of those engaged in the operation of our 
power tr-nsnission lines. (See Ap icndis A attached.) Others ?rc employed 

he offices of the Sheriff -no. H calth Director. (County rnd rlr.csler Health 
Home - Sen Mateo County.) 

Cert i 1I5 in the case of these employes, there would a.ppear to be no 
valid reason for any residence restrictions, because most of then not only want, to 
live in the vicinity of their employment, but some cf the: are actually required 
to live there, rnd it is well from San Francisco's c s i&rsoint that these 
employes should become citizens of the county they reside in, and do their bit 
in building up i'ood relationships between San Francisco and the other counties v/c 
pay taxes to. And one other practical point: there is such a thing as ; housing 
short? :e -- all the more re; son why ^ _ u' ■ ploy s i * nearby counties should be 

urpged to find homes in the vicinity of their jobs. Therefore, I recommend a 
charter amend] to waive residence restrictions for city employes whose work is 
performed outside of San Fra.ncisco». 

And in this •-river I would include those senior or junior executives who. 
hold specialized jobs, such as Manager of Utilities, Director of City Plrnnin-, end 
Director oh Public 'forks, ;nd free ourselves, r.s the Board of Educa.tion is free, 
to pick the best qur-lified .v -n for the job, _ regardless cf where he from; we 
want the top-side nen, i nh there is no valid business reason for us to limit 
ourselves to San Francisco residents. 

Eight rlon ; these srnc 11 charter req at that the Mayor 

may nr-nc to various commissi ma r r bor.rds, anly people who lived in Sr.n 
Francisco for five years or longer. Theri pre nan; whose t in p] ■ c 
business or whose interests lie solely in San Francisco, but who are forced for 
family, health or other reasons to live outside the city limits; yet those very 

light be key on certain boards or commissions, and it does seer, tha.t charter 
s night be made to allow the Mayor greeter la.titude in his selections. 

police! z:; ;:td firemen 

I an more than ever convinced that the best interests of the City would 
be served if salaries and wages of all members of the Police and Fire Departments 
neve fixed through the regular salary standardization procedure as provided by 
the Charter, rather than by vote of the people. 

You will recall that your Honorable Board refused to submit such an 
amendment to the people when I urged such action last September. I express the 
hope that your Honorable Board will reconsider and, in due course, permit the 
voters to express themselves on the Charter Amendment recommended by me last 


I believe that present procedure as provided by our Charter is in 
many respects 'unsatisfactory — not only to City officiers and employes but 
to those charged with the duty of fixing salaries, as well as to the people of 
the community. 

I shall not attempt to enumerate all the various causes for dissatis- 
faction but I can point out that in addition to the policemen and firemen who 
do not come under the regular procedure, the Municipal Railway platform men as 
well as certain per diem craft employes are receiving special and preferred 


treatment, as the result of recent Charter Amendments, 

A number of court suits aro now ponding to secure an interpretation of 
Dne amendment (Section 151.5) and, if certain decisions of the lower State court 
3re uphold by the State Supreme Court, the various City departments will have some 
iiffioult and costly adjustments to make, as well as new and difficult adminis- 
trative problems to face. 

In my message of March 18, 194-6 to your Honorable Board disapproving 
Salary Standardization Ordinance 3966, I mentioned the decision of the State 
Supreme Court in the case of the City and County of San Francisco v. Boyd 
22 Cal. Rep. (2nd) 685, which I believe may make trouble for the City in future 

y recommendation to your Honorable Board as well as to the Mayor-elect 
is that a very thorough study be made by all concerned as to what Charter changes 
in salary standardization procedure are desirable — with the thought that a 
better and more explicit yardstick might be set up for determining the wages and 
salaries and working conditions of City and County employes than now exists. 

And we all know the rising cost of living accompanied by the decreasing 
value of the dollar has made the problem of adjusting compensations much more 
difficult in recent years. Hence it is desirable under present eruditions that 
the Civil Service Commission staff be adequate to keep thoroughly up to date on 
and working condition data throughout the State. 

In making thi3 recommendation, I am not suggesting deviation from the 
Charter provision that compensation of City and County employes "shall be in 
accord with the generally prevailing rates of wages for like services and working 
conditions in private employment or in other governmental organizations in this 


On the' other hand, the changes I have In mind would be along the lines 
of clarifying and strengthening the general intent of that broad policy. 

I know that the thorough study I recommend will take time and much 
thought — but I do hope that the necessary amendments remedying the present 
difficulties in salary standardization procedure can be submitted to the people 
at the general election next November. 


I recommend the Charter be amended to make the office of Assessor an 
appointive rather than an elective position. There is no doubt the duties of 

SSOr are mainly technical. The rules governing assessment are laid down by 
law, and it is the Assessor's duty to carry out the provisions of the law. It 
is not a policy-making job although one requiring the exercise of reasonable 
independent judgment. What is expected of an Assessor is that he deal squarely 
and fairly with all concerned so that no taxpayer is assessed proportionately 
more than another taxpayer. 

I believe an Assessor, appointed by the Mayer, subject to confirmation 
by your honorable Board and to hold permanent tenure, is less likely to be 
persuaded by political considerations than if he has to run for office ever- 
years, as at present. 

There will be much opposition to this amendment coming from strong and 
powerful special interest groups. Unquestionably much presi 1 be exerted 
to prevent the submission of this am< n Li ent. 

I hope your honorable Board will permit the voters to express their 
views . 


At the election last November, there was submitted to the voters and 
turned down a Charter Amendment aimed to bring about a merger of the Park and 

- 6 - 

Recreation Commissions. Although this amendment v;as defeated, I still bcli " 
it is in the best interests of the Cit brought about, cither 

by the resubmission of the same amendment or by another modified on . ', reasons 
for this I n frankly and freely stated, but for the purpose of the record 
I at a 3, a public statement released October 13, 194.7, urging the 

Ion of Charter Amendment Proposition Mo. 9. I will not comment fur 
pt to express the hope that Mayor-elect Robinson, a 

, will give this matter earnest consideration. 


. Commission handles t] >t business of the City, with one 
Generf ager having general kit. rvision, and five appointive Coi rs 
meeting once a week (compensation, &100 a month) to determine matters of policy. 
Analyzing ,r r r visibilities of these Commissioners, it would .heir scope 

r well be decentralized and broken up into three parts. Mun icipa l Railw ay 
will always be the most difficult of any municipal business to handle because 
every . rides a street err or a Dus is either a transportation expert or 
a potential one. It is the one City operation with which the general public is 
most familiar and it will always be a political football to a greater or less 

I suggest as a first step that the Municipal Railway's operations be 
divorced from the Pub] ' .ion and set up under a separate Com- 

mission. I further suggest that this Commission be allowed to operate the 
railway without many of the restrictive Charter provisions which now hamper 
cipal management . Unquestionably this is the operation in City government 
. more closely than any other parallels private operation. It would there- 
be reasonable to give the City railway management freedom of action 
approximating that enjoy private railway operators. 

- 7 

I do emphasize, however, one outstanding factor - the profit motive is 

not present in municipal operation. Service , , d by th 

ploying public. I have horotofnro maintained that the riding public should 
the bill and that cur railway should bo self-supporting. But the capital expendi- 
tures now required after a long period of neglected repi , - with all 
the mounting operating costs, accompanied by an increasing nunber of privately 
owned automobiles loads no to this reluctant conclusion viz.: that to 
support the railroad operation, other than fares collected, will have to be found 
— either from the ad valorem taxpayer or elsewhere. 

Perhaps in the not too distant future, it will bo possible to 3ot up 
a metropolitan transit authority to take over all local mass transportation, 
not only in San Francisco but in some adjoining counties. When the time cor.^s 
to finance underground transportation or additional mass transportation acros3 
the Bay, the authority would be in a position to undertake that . Other metro- 
politan areas, such as Boston and more recently Chicago have developed area 
transit authorities. 

The problems of urban mass transportation accompanied by the ever- 
increasing demands for freeways, highways, wider stroets, and off-street parking 
are not local. They are the "pain in the neck" of all urban communities. But 
on the other hand, collective action among adjoining communities to solve these 
mutual problems nay well fester better neighborhood relations. Everyone is 
interested in spending loss time travelling between home and work. Any plan 
which can achieve that objective will meet with popular favor and will off 
jealousies often existing between local political subdivisions. 


Our airport in San Mateo County is developing rapidly and there will be 
many now problems in connection with its growth. I believe a separate commission 

is required to handle our airport or any other airports the City might eventually 
develop ard, therefore, I urge a Charter amendment bhat will div i air ort 
operations fro- the control of the Public Utilities Commission. 

watsr, power, light 

If the preceding recommendations wore followed it would leave the 
Public Utilities Commission the duty and rear, neibility of operating our wcter, 
r, 1 light systems. This is in itself a big business and ..111 
require mi re and more future attention. 

The Public Utilities Commission has in mind the construction of the 
Cherry River Project and the power plant at Red Mountain Bar, but before any 
real steps are taken in that direction, I urge that efforts bo made to amend the 
Raker Act so the City would be free to dispose of all its powjr — the development 
cost of which has been and 'ill bo financed by the taxpayers of San Francisco — 
in any way it deems fit. 


I believe that the Charter amendments I have suggested would make for 
greater efficiency in City and County government • But make no mistake — cl 
in law or improvements in procedure are not a cure-all, for the success or failure 
of government lies largely in the hands of those responsible for its operations* 
My r,i r st sincere hop;., is that, as time goes on, more and more intelligent and 
civic-minded citizens of this community will be willing to assume .greater civic 
responsibilities whether in elective or appointive positions — not only for the 
purpose of making San Francisco a better place to iiv^ in, but to help strengthen 
our democratic form of government in all its branches, local, State, and Federal. 
Democracy needs strengthening all along the line but the fror.t line of local 
government is the °'~-'^ which touches us all most cl.scly. In these days of .. r orld 
tension and national stress, history will record whether we cherish democracy — 


an i by that I mean self government under law — de ■■ lough to be willing to 

Lfice our time and self-inH , reat 

Engli orian once said, "All ent is by cor.:. , to 

fcMch added, ''And they generally ^et the ,;;over. 

Lsm is on the narch. bareness i.-; against it ;:.. 

consciousness of civic duty is the other half. 

Lng may I reviev; with you verj briefly the rccor 
four-yoar term, on the day I took office I said that the basic duty of 
Layer was to coordinate and enforce eeop^ratior between all departments of ' 

and County, and added th . .:coss or failure of ., 

would be measured largely by how '."ell J accomplished this. My record in this 
respect has not been 1001. It' I had Jav s I do now, I would 

exorcised more of the .• ■ < : . Ilea .1;: inherent in the Mayor' '. j n. let, 

ce considerable satisfaction in the wo 
Transportation Planning and its Technic - _nt 

t this long-range planning job they are nor/ una ruitful 

resul a . 

I -'ant to thank ail who have assisted ne in ;r. — your He. 

Board 01 Supervisors, and the many fine men ana womei -• on the 

various boards ana Commissions to which I appointed . hours of 

faithful — and often than - ./ice they have rendered to their City. 

And '-. have found in our City govern iio.luint, responsible 

Lsti .ve positions who are quietly and efficiently h an d ling th 
tasks, expecting no praise and silently taking unjust criticism as par-; of tl 
regular job. 


I want to thank the people of San Francisco . >ed me to 

their Mayor — not only once but twice, ior the sa v . 

Chief Executive of the great cosmopolit ; of San Francisco is 

privilege and a liberal education. 

It is a full-time job for anyone who takes it 
is the greatest opportunity I have ever had — an opportunil any 

all kinds of people — a front seat to observe the workings of 
and abeve all, tc play some part in helping Can Francisco to build tor 
future which lies before her. 

I can look back with satisfaction to my share in tl n of 

t Streot Railway, oven thougi 'ull wii»d not 

i yet be apparent. I :m happy, too, In knowing that all the nine bond Issues 
totalling ovor 120 million dollars, put forw< luring my i Lon were 

approved by the people, by substantial majority s. 

Much remains to be done, such as the construction of ne? schools, 
police stations, fire houses, libraries, courts, and city office buildings — 
but the foundation has boen laid. 1 wish Maj Robinson and the now 

administration all good luck in going for i i San Francisco. 

li j ■ 

/ / 

D. Lapham 




December 29. 1947 

San Mateo 
Santa Clara 
San Joaquin 

S. I. 

Muni . 

S. 7. Water 
























October 13, 19^7 APPENDIX P 

Charter Amendment Proposition Ko. 9 

This amendment will merge the present Park and Recreation Departments 
into one Public Recreation Department, a step which I have advocated for some tine - 
prober streamlining in city government. The Park and Recreation Departments today 
have the same general objectives. They furnish areas and facilities for all kinds 
of recreation, juvenile and adult. The two departments parallel each other in 
many ways. Each operates revenue producing units - each purchases land and improves 
it either for passive or active recreation - each maintains men and equipment to do 
similar maintenance work, and in many cases the properties of both departments 
either actually adjoin each other or are in close proximity. My experience with 
four annual budgets convinces me that the two departments can be operated jointly 
and provide greater service to the public. 

Substantial savings will crme in dollar expenditures for capital improve- 
ments. Unquestionably parts of some properties now operated for park purposes 
only can be utilized for playgrounds similar to those maintained presently by the 
Recreation Department. The organized recreation program can be expanded. The 
amendment specifically sets forth a declaration of policy that "it is the intention 
that the organized recreation program shall be safeguarded and that the highest 
standards of public recreation shall be promoted and maintained by the Public 
Recreation Commission." 

I realize that in certain quarters there is some concern about this con- 
solidation similar to that experienced by the Federal government when it proposed 
the consolidation of the Army and Navy. But this consolidation is right in 
principle and should be considered from the overall standpoint. 

I am firmly convinced that starting fresh with a new Public Recreation 
Commission is in the best interest of the city, and I am confirmed in this opinion 
by the fsct that oth=r cities, both in and out of California, have combined to 
advantage the functions of the two departments. Only recently voters in Los Angeles 
and San Diego approved consolidation, and there is no doubt but that it is the 
modern trend. City government is frequently criticized for mounting costs. Here is 
an opportunity to save cost and at the same time provide better service. 

I strongly urge a YES vote.